srythfandomcom-20200214-history
Talk:Proving Grounds
Master Adventurer Rewards 18 ATs for the 3rd Order of Adventurers seems to be inaccurate, at least in some cases. I just got 20 ATs for a 93% on PG IV. --Psychoadept 00:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Anonymous user 71.59.3.172 changes I have reverted edits by this anonymous user, since he has only added raw unverified data, and at same time changed entire table distribution. You can check in this oldid the page version. Basically, (s)he added rewards of 16 and 14 AT for 4th and 5th ranks of adventurers. If anybody else can confirm, we can put the values back into the main page Scarbrowtalk 16:30, 11 March 2009 (UTC) : I would say leave it since I assume they tested it. Until someone disputes it. K!ZeRotalk 06:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC) I just received 20AT for 93% on PG V. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.190.135.50 (talk • ) Rewards for PG 1 My first time through PG 1 I died on one scenario (7.1), and ended up in the second order, but I only got 20 ATs Jimyred 01:51, November 11, 2009 (UTC) PG III I got a 96% success rate, putting me in the second order, but I only received 20 AT's DarkJak92 19:10, September 3, 2010 (UTC) Quest pages? Should the Proving Grounds (each subsection) be made into quest pages? Each proving grounds article is really long, and the subsections are basically stand-alone quests. As a quest page, people can get the spoiler-free information without having to skim through other parts. Plus, they would be easier to edit, and be more consistent. I don't see a need for all the proving ground sections to be together, so I'd like to have each section be a separate quest page transcluded from the individual proving ground 1-5 pages. Thoughts? K!ZeRotalk 15:44, September 13, 2010 (UTC) : I can't speak for everybody, but one of the reasons I've refrained to do as you suggest is the sheer size of the PG articles. Also, if you know where you're going, you don't need to skim at all: just use the TOC to jump to the appropriate section (Quest name). However, I also see a number of problems, specific of PG's nature, that would stem from that approach: :* Since the PG quests are sequential, what would be a spoiler if you find it at random it certainly won't be such once you reach the appropriate point in history. Examples: Rynduil's past in PG V, or Jirig's family in PG IV. Sequential treatment of the PGs articles is on itself a kind of spoiler insurance. :* There is no real need to access most sub-quests by themselves, since they are all on-going, and many of them are quite short. :* Adding Quest namespace articles for each and every one of these would artificially increase Quest count (this is rather a minor point, since there are also a good number of small standalone quests) :* Reading through a PG story/saga would be innecessarily cumbersome, having to go to the (mostly small) quest page at every step just to go back and follow the story. Imagine this for the second half of PG IV, or the last section of PG I. Actually, I think this is the strongest point. : Scarbrowtalk 19:54, September 13, 2010 (UTC) :: I don't know... I think how the PG articles are probably used should determine the organization of the articles. The small, or even non-existent action, quests may not benefit from the split and I don't like splitting them off. But the benefit would be that the difficulty of each stand-alone quest is easy to see. And quests that provide ATs, or AS&P, or skill acquisition, etc would be separate and easily categorized. :: IMO, the only reason to keep it one article would be because a user wanted to get the AT bonus from completing the whole thing, and was going to go through the entire PG in one go. If completing the PG in parts, having transcluded questboxes and separate pages is the same as going to the table of contents to find a particular section. :: As for my use of the article, I would have liked it as separate articles when I went to go through only part of PG 5 to get Shadow Magic so that I can skim the difficulties up to that point. Also, it seemed strange to me that the entire PG has to be categorized, vs the small quests of that PG. :: Hm, maybe just adding some questboxes can make it look like less than a wall of text? Anyway, I'm going to let all this simmer... until I do PG 2 for Troll-bont, heh. K!ZeRotalk 02:37, September 17, 2010 (UTC) ::: Idea 1: You could just add Questboxes for summaries, without having to create separate Quest pages. In fact, it was their original intended use, remember? ::: Idea 2: Having a kind of a separated page with a roadmap to each PG, which would just contain Questboxes or something like that (maybe a version of with some modifications to suit the PGs narrative and gameplay style). On that roadmap page you could have a Tips section to say something like "blah, blah, do this and that, and reach that adventure to get Shadow Magic". Or we could add a Tips section to the original article, thus providing a third way to use the article (plowing through and using the TOC being the other two). ::: Idea 3: Separate just the "long" quests (like the court of the spider king) from the rest, allowing for your aforementioned categorizing of the "special" AS&P, AT, etc quests, and also shortening the whole article, which would have a mix of Questbox-hidden Quest pages and just text for short sections as now. ::: Scarbrowtalk 19:17, September 19, 2010 (UTC) Item Loss on Quit The "Features" section on the main page says changes to inventory are saved, but the game happily purged the superior/exceptional items I'd picked up durring the latter stages of PGII when I finished a stage but clicked 'quit' without exiting the proving grounds and clicking save manually.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Datashade (talk • ) : so sorry. It was what my investigations showed at the moment. I'll put up a note about this. Scarbrowtalk 06:24, November 30, 2011 (UTC)